EC President Being Investigated for Misconduct

A horse deal gone wrong is a tale as old as time, but one Canadian family found justice in a Belgian court because of the country’s comprehensive consumer protection laws. Having secured the victory over Equestrian Canada’s president, Chris Sorensen, the buyers are now requesting that Equestrian Canada (EC) uphold their own Code of Conduct and Ethics and sanction Sorensen for his actions.

In September 2017, Roberta and Kendra Martenfeld travelled to Belgium for a horse shopping trip with Chris Sorensen. They found a few interesting horses and, after the pre-purchase exam on their first choice revealed issues, they settled on Feliek-H (aka Phil). The seven-year-old gelding had a clean pre-purchase exam by a vet who was sourced by Sorensen and was sold for 164,000 euros as a 1.40m jumper prospect for Kendra and was shipped to Ontario the following month.

When he arrived, Kendra noticed that Phil would repeatedly jerk his hind foot when it was picked up. Her trainer at the time noted that the horse had shivers, but said it was nothing to worry about. The Martenfelds accepted that assessment and were unaware of the severity of the problem, which is a chronic neuromuscular disease.

Scroll to continue with content

“I would never have purchased a horse with a pre-existing defect,” commented Roberta, Kendra’s mother. “Prior to looking it up online, my knowledge of shivers was very limited, but I felt that it was benign – a horse might yank its leg or have a twitch, but nothing serious.”

Shortly thereafter, Kendra changed trainers. While the new trainer agreed that the condition wasn’t cause for concern, warning signs of a progression started to appear.

“The winter went on and some days he was a rockstar and other days he was crazed,” explained Roberta. As Kendra was attending university, her trainer suggested that it would be wise to send the horse to Florida for the winter for some additional training.

The Martenfelds made the trip to Florida in March so they could check on the horse’s progress and Kendra could compete with him. Her first day of competition went well, but the next day “he was a different horse,” said Roberta. “In the warm-up ring he almost flipped over backwards, his behaviour was erratic and less rideable.”

During that same trip to Florida, Roberta happened to watch the farrier fit Phil with new shoes. “It took him forever,” she said. “The farrier had to constantly give him a rest because he was trembling with shivers. This prompted me to go back to the hotel and look it up for the first time. When I read the articles, I decided that I didn’t want to keep the horse. I had no idea that it can be progressive, it can be debilitating, it can lead to euthanasia, it can lead to a drop in performance. There is even speculation that it can lead to head pain and tooth pain and erratic behaviour.”

Shivers is relatively rare and researchers suspect that it’s a genetic issue. It’s also hard to diagnose with symptoms varying in severity from day to day. There is no treatment, but some horses can continue to compete at a high level while others can degenerate more quickly.

“If Chris had disclosed this condition and said, ‘By the way, this horse has shivers but tons of horses have it and it’s nothing to worry about,’ the first thing I would have done is research it,” said Roberta. “I would have found all of this research and known that this issue was beyond my comfort level.”

In a written statement to Horse Sport (read Chris Sorensen’s full statement here), Sorensen states that he verbally told the Martenfelds that the horse had shivers but, when questioned for this article, did not reveal why he did not include that information in the sale agreement, as required under Belgian law.

The Martenfelds determined that they were not prepared to keep a horse with this condition and struck a deal with Sorensen that they would return Phil and Sorensen would either find them a new mount or refund the money. The horse was shipped back to Sorensen in April 2018, but for months afterward the Martenfelds heard nothing from him about a refund or a new horse despite repeated attempts to contact him that went unanswered.

“He refused to talk to me,” said Roberta. “Any time I got in touch he said ‘I will only deal through your professional.’”

Having been the principal negotiator in the original purchase of the horse, Roberta is confused as to why he insisted on dealing with their trainer, especially odd since the trainer had nothing to do with the purchase of the horse and had specifically asked Sorensen to deal directly with the Martenfelds.

“There was one time when Marvin did get him on the phone, maybe he surprised him with an unknown number. Chris answered and said that he was working on replacing the horse and didn’t have the money to refund it. We never got one video, one prospect, nothing on a replacement horse,” said Roberta. “He has our horse and he has our money. We just want him to offer us something reasonable. Do something that will solve this for everyone involved.”

Unable to resolve the conflict on their own, the Martenfelds felt they had no choice but to initiate court proceedings. As it turns out, Belgium has a law designed specifically to protect consumers who are not involved in business dealings when buying from a professional. In particular, there is a six-month return period that covers undisclosed pre-existing conditions.

After losing their initial case heard by a Justice of the Peace, the Martenfelds won the appeal in June of this year. The courts ordered Sorensen to pay back the purchase price of the horse plus 15,000 euros in additional expenses and legal costs. Of note, the ruling specifically mentioned that the existence of a clause in Sorensen’s sale contract stating that the horse was sold without any “explicit or implicit guarantees or warranties as to the fitness of the horse for a given use or as a regards the health or soundness of the horse and that the purchasers confirm and agree to purchase the horse in the state in which they find it” was irrelevant, and was superseded by Belgian law on hidden defects.

Several months after the ruling, the Martenfelds still have not been reimbursed. When seeking payment on their behalf, the Belgian court’s bailiff discovered that Sorensen’s company, Sorensen Stables EU, was dissolved at the end of 2020 and no longer held any assets. As the court’s ruling was both against Sorensen’s company and him personally, the Martenfelds are pursuing all avenues to reimburse their costs.

In his statement to Horse Sport, Sorensen commented that it was “the first time we have ever had legal action initiated against us” although he is currently the subject of at least two more lawsuits here in Canada. Sorensen hopes to appeal the matter with the Martenfelds to Belgium’s Supreme Court, but the Martenfelds’ lawyer is confident that the case does not have enough relevance to the national interest to warrant a review.

Jessica Mawson has also confirmed that she has filed a lawsuit against Sorensen over horses that she had purchased from him. Another party, who wished to remain anonymous, has also confirmed to Horse Sport that they have filed a lawsuit against Sorensen over another horse sale gone wrong. Neither party will comment before the cases are resolved.

EC’s Response

The Martenfelds first made Equestrian Canada aware of their dispute with Sorensen two years ago and followed up last month with a copy of the translated court transcript of their successful case. In response, EC’s CEO, Meg Krueger, referred the matter to EC’s independent third-party dispute resolution service.

“EC takes complaints very seriously and upholds an established and well-defined complaints process that is followed diligently,” commented Melanie McLearon, EC’s Director of Marketing & Communication. “EC’s Discipline, Complaints, and Appeals (DCA) Policy governs all reported complaints, including those related to Safe Sport and general complaints submitted under the EC Rules. Any concerns, complaints or allegations brought to EC staff must be redirected to the independent third-party. EC’s independent Complaint Manager, W&W Dispute Resolution Services Inc, determines if it falls within EC’s jurisdiction and whether to proceed with an investigation.”

If the Complaint Manager determines the complaint does fall within EC’s jurisdiction, there are “a variety of options to proceed in the process including but not limited to mediation, assigning an Investigator, or selecting and engaging a Hearing Panel to determine actions, sanctions or other penalizations required according to the Disciplines, Complaints and Appeals Policy,” explained McLearon.

The Martenfelds are frustrated with the process and feel that EC should act more swiftly when faced with the evidence they have provided.

“Allowing Chris Sorensen to remain in his role when the Belgian Court has affirmed he acted dishonestly as a professional in the equine industry, and when I am confirming that he will not honour his obligation to the Court and to us, is shameful,” commented Roberta.

Indeed, as president of EC and according to EC’s own Code of Conduct & Ethics, Sorensen is supposed to be held to a higher standard. If that standard will be enforced, and how, remains to be seen.